***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 52 *****
For the continued discussion of all things pertaining to Speed Cameras.
This is Volume 51.
There is no need to repeat anything since earlier volumes will not be deleted. But then if we only posted original stuff the backroom would grind to a halt in a fortnight.
;o)
A list of previous volumes can be found by clicking HERE
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 25/01/2010 at 21:31
|
Driving to Gainsborough along A 431 on Sunday, it was sunny, dry and with very light traffic.
Being in no hurry I would normally have been happy to roll along at about 50mph in the absence of a limit anyway, as this is a relaxed, economical cruising speed.
This otherwise pleasant drive was spoilt by the succession of average speed cameras enforcing a 50 limit, so I found myself constantly having to check to ensure I didn't exceed 50 on the occasional downhill parts.
I thought fixed Gatso's had a tolerance of a few miles per hour in their settings, does anyone know if there is a similar tolerance on the average speed cameras?
(Not that I want to take advantage of such a margin, I would just be less paranoid about watching the speedometer!)
|
Switch on your sat nav but don't programme in a destination just leave it on, then make sure it knows the road is a 50 limit, the second you go over it will bleep like mad.
I would have thought there would have to be a margin in too, e.g I doubt they could give you a ticket if your average speed was 51.
Edited by Rattle on 08/12/2009 at 20:22
|
I just set my cruise control to a satnav 50, (55 on the speedo), not had a ticket yet.
I have a chuckle at the people who fly past and slow down for the cameras, obviously "average" is a bit beyond their comprehension.
|
I do as the matelot does. Set the cruise to 50mph sat nav speed. If you dont have satnav or cruise, wavering between 50 and 55mph is ok.
|
|
|
|
Switch on your sat nav but don't programme in a destination just leave it on then make sure it knows the road is a 50 limit the second you go over it will bleep like mad. I would have thought there would have to be a margin in too e.g I doubt they could give you a ticket if your average sped was 51
Rattle
I don't always bother putting the Satnav in the car, and in any case new speed limits appear almost daily so it means manually setting a speed alarm when the SatNav doesn't know about a new limit.
I too feel there must be some sort of allowance, it presumably depends on distance between cameras/actual limit etc., but what are the guidelines?
|
the allowance for prosecution is 10% plus 2mph
|
And my understanding is that the speedo account's for the 10% already (to avoid the manufcaturer being sued for causing speeding offences).
So using AE's figures (which I agree with) you would need to register a speed of 58 mph before you were caught.
|
Maybe I'm wrong by calculation goes like this:--
Using the indicated speed on the satnav as correct and AE's allowance
50 +10%=55 mph
55 + 2 = 57 mph
So I could legally drive with 57 mph indicated on the satnav and be ok.
Now I reckon my speedo reads 6% high, so when I am doing the above 57 mph on the satnav, the indicated speed on my speedo would be 57 + 6% ie 60.42 mph
So I could drive through a 50 mph average speed zone, with 60 mph on the speedo and *theoretically* be OK.
Scary - but it would explain why I feel as though I am the slowest car on the road sometimes in these zones!!!!
FTF
|
|
|
|
Your right about these things distracting safe driving. I was driving through parts of Nottingham last weekend and I got fed up of Dorris telling me to "beware - watch your speed" - it was one after the other. As such you get distracted by the cameras and don't concentrate on the road as much as you should. Numerous times I ended up in the wrong lane and I was always mindful that all I was doing was concentrating on cameras. Unfortunately it is an obsession in the country. In a few years some University will spend millions on research and tell us what we already know - that speed cameras cause you to concentrate less on your surroundings such as pedestrians etc and are causing an increase in road accidents.
I always work on the 10% rule as others have said above and have never got caught yet (touching wood).
|
I thought the whole point of an average speed camera was that it doesn't matter if you wander a bit over the limit at one point as it's measuring the average over a reasonable distance. Not sure if doing a ton then slowing to a crawl will work though. ;-)
It isn't safe to rely on the speedo being 10% optimistic, Vectra B speedos, at least, read more or less bang on.
|
The law does state that the indicated speed must not exceed 110% of the actual speed - hence the 10% rule. Also the law states that the car speedometer must never show an indicated speed less than the actual speed.
Not sure if that helps though ?
|
|
All I'm saying is that when my lovely blue Vectra's speedo indicates 70 I'm actually doing 70 not 64, as many cars would indicate.
|
|
Apologies Spamcan - I was not doubting your post - just adding a general comment to the whole thread.
|
|
No worries, I just didn't want hordes of Vectra B drivers up before the beak because they'd assumed their speedos were under reading and adjusted their speed upwards as a result ;-)
|
|
|
|
The 10% + 2mph is not a given, it is in the ACPO guidelines. As I understand it, most police forces usually do stuff by those guidelines - but not always.
And speed cameras (especially mobile ones) are often run by the local speed camera partnership, or some such body, which is not part of the police, and will interpret limits however they want.
Edited by smokie on 08/12/2009 at 23:46
|
|
|
|
|
In my very limited experience I tend to find the presence of normal speed cameras far more distracting than average speed cameras, simply because if I temporarily go over the the speed limit on an average speed camera I would expect to "average down" during the rest of the measured distance, so I am not so obsessed by watching the needle.
In comparison, with normal cameras I definitely feel that I am spending too much time watching the needle rather than the road, especially because I have not memorised where the cameras are (if I see a sign for average speed cameras, I assume that there are no normal cameras in the same area).
I do generally agree with camera enforcement, but I do think that there is a big problem with the obsessing about never going over the limit, and getting distracted as a result.
It seems to me that all cameras should be average speed cameras, as they seem to prevent intentional speeding while not forcing drivers to obsess over the needle.
Edited by SteelSpark on 08/12/2009 at 20:56
|
At one time there were plans to introduce a huge number of average speed cameras to whole regions and these would monitor your average speed across a number of different roads - motorway and onto A roads etc.
Maybe the Bankers have saved us from that one - we will be using our taxes to pay for Bank bonuses and not more speed cameras.
|
At one time there were plans to introduce a huge number of average speed cameras to whole regions and these would monitor your average speed across a number of different roads - motorway and onto A roads etc. Maybe the Bankers have saved us from that one - we will be using our taxes to pay for Bank bonuses and not more speed cameras.
This plan may not be as dead as you think...
preview.tinyurl.com/yf3kh55
|
|
|
|
>>distraction?<<
Nope. I find a pretty woman far more distracting and Im not gonna advocate they are banned :-)
|
|
|
As others say speedo fixation/distraction is a potential, albiet very minor, issue with "spot" speed cameras.
If you need to concentrate to maintain keep your average below the limit there's something wrong with either your observational or vehicle control skills.
|
|
|
With the first generation of these things you had to stay in the same lane, and I suppose they are still like that. So the thing to do is switch lanes at an undiminished 100mph whenever you see one. Should keep some people on their toes.
Unfortunately I haven't a clue what they look like. Are they signposted? Should we just assume they are everywhere?
Suck egg mule....
|
The "Network" system, described above, is coming to a 20 mph zone near you soon! An item is yesterdays DT reported 99.3% compliance with SPECS camera speed limits in 7 zones that were monitored.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Story here
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1239149/Police-hu...l
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 29/12/2009 at 14:57
|
Excelent. Blowing things up has so much more class than simple vandalism.
It shows a good sense of the history of revolution and anarchism.
|
|
Well done that man (or woman), keep up the good work!
|
Thank you secret Santa - that's the best gift you can give to motorists on Xmas day
=:-)
|
|
|
Surely the most important part of that story is buried at the end of the item.
"The attack comes as officials in Swindon, Wiltshire, confirmed that the number of motorists caught speeding has halved since they banned fixed cameras in the town.
In the three months between August 1 and October 31, 2009, just 1,033 motorists received Notices of Intended Prosecution after being caught by mobile cameras.
But in the same three-month period in 2008 when the fixed position Gatso cameras were in place, the figure was 2,227"
|
Surely the most important part of that story is buried at the end of the item.
And reported elsewhere
www.express.co.uk/posts/view/148579/Crash-deaths-d...p
eed-cameras-axed-
A TOWN which axed its speed cameras has seen the number of deaths on its roads fall to zero, it was revealed yesterday.
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 29/12/2009 at 15:16
|
It went from 1 fatal and 4 minor injury accidents, to 2 serious and 4 minor injury accidents.
This is statistically irrelevant, but then what do you expect from tabloid science ?
Swindon's population is around 180,000 (~0.3% of UK population).
0.3% of road fatalities per annum = 10 per annum, or 2.5 per quarter.
Maybe Swindon has become more safe because they had Gatsos for a while and there is a 'memory' effect on driving behaviour.
Or maybe it's a lot of b@ll@x (more likely).
Edited by Lygonos on 29/12/2009 at 15:20
|
wonder if it flashed before it banged
bet that was a picture ,what a carry on
|
|
|
|
An inevitable avalanche of 'good on yer, mate' comments.
Well, just remember, you will be paying for the camera to be fixed and the police investigation.
They've got an acting chief inspector on the case - I bet she's on £60K a year or more.
More importantly, she could be better employed looking for proper criminals, rather than this clown.
So when you ring the cops about something you think is important and you get told they are too busy, think about all the resources wasted on tosh like this.
I deplore vandalism, irrespective of who owns the property or what it is used for.
This guy is no hero, he is just a low-level criminal of which this country sadly seems to have thousands.
Edited by ifithelps on 29/12/2009 at 15:26
|
I think it is very unikely that an acting chief inspector goes "Looking for Criminals"! More likely to be in an office ticking boxes on mindless charts required by Central Government to ensure that everyone has done their gender diverstity and inclusion training for the year.
More to the point, let us hope that it wasn't some jihadist practicing, before going to NY!
|
|
|
Hi
if speed cameras were indeed use as they were supposed to be, ie 'safety cams' then I fully support them.
At times, even with the in-built sat nav, in new areas i do feel lost. So when travelling down a long straigh road that appears to be clear, seeing a big yellow cam ensures that I'm well within-in the speed limit as it never hurts to double check your speed.
however, the full frontal and newer small cams that are high up and quiet small as not ruddy safety cams but there to make money - just like the observation cams that went up to protect people but catch people out in yellow boxed junctions/etc.
i do not advocate driving in a bus lane and do not do this as its anti-social. however, when travelling to new areas, and the times when some bus lanes bwecome operational is baffaling. in leeds, near the town there was a bus lane for a few yards that was operational fro 7 to 10:00hrs and a bit further on a 24/7, then reverted back to the 7 -10 & 14;00 to 18;00 - imo, to catch out unwitting motorists. Though I've never been caught out for any traffic offence, yet.
|
I've never been caught out for any traffic offence, yet.
I would lay money that many here will be hoping earnestly that you soon will be.
I'm not among them. It will only make you worse.
:o]
|
|
|
|
nobody said the guy is a hero,i equate it to school dinners and the dinner lady dropping a plate and we all went wahayhay its the british way,maybe you need to chill a bit?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The M1 through Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire is to get permanent speed cameras to enforce variable limits.
Temporary cameras installed for widening road works between junctions 25 and 28 have proved so effective they will stay, it has been confirmed.
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/nottinghamshire/843837...m
|
What is a managed motorway ?
Is that where you take an asset paid for by the general motoring public into private ownership out of the kindness of your heart for the greater good ?
Does this mean all other sections of motorway are not managed ?
|
|
Just a repetition of the nonsense on the M42 (and now M6). Hard shoulder running and variable limits. Been around for ages.
|
It surprises me what passes for "effective" these days in the UK.
No actual start and end dates are published but say the works ran from 15 May 2008 to 15 October 2009, that is a total of 518 days. 131000 vehicles per day apparently use this stretch of motorway, over the duration that's 67,858,000 vehicles travelling that section and 5,084 were caught speeding.
Less than 0.008% of all the vehicles were deemed to be speeding. Hardly worthy of headline news and an overhaul of motorway management.
|
I think they use the word 'effective' in that so few drivers chose to speed on this section - so the measures did work.
I have had to drive this stretch a few times and given that it was choc-a-block with traffic the system DID seem to keep it moving steadily (at least the few times I was on there).
|
I lived in Sheffield for ten years and used this section of motorway at least twice a week. 29 to 28 heading South and 23a to 25 North were always the bottlenecks in my experience.
The section in the above article only had problems when the traffic on the slip roads was backing onto the Motorway. Maybe they sorted the lights controlling the slips ?
They had to put an extra lane in at Meadowhall to help with this kind of congestion.
|
|
|
|
Enforced 70 won't bother me, I'll do indicated 75 as I do now.
But, if sections such as the M42 are managed to allow hard shoulder running why over lunchtime on 23rd December were there 3 lanes of traffic limited to 40 mph, doing 30 at best, yet all the time there's a nice big red cross over the hard shoulder?
It completely defeats the object of using the hard shoulder to increase capacity if the man in charge of turning off the red crosses goes on his break at 12pm!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just a quickie (ahem). I haven't seen any of those mobile vans recently. I wonder where they are. What are they doing now & the people employed to run em. Maybe out gritting eh.
|
|
There's going to be a lot of cutbacks, because of police budget cuts.... it will be interesting to see whether or not safety camera partnerships feels some pain,
|
|
I always thought these were the responsibility of the local authority. But work in conjuction with the police. Eg supposodly looking at the local police database of accident stastistics for the area.
|
|
Doubt if anyone is going fast enough in current road conditions...
|
Doubt if anyone is going fast enough in current road conditions...
I wonder if, come the thaw, they'll try to make up on lost revenue and meet targets by lowering thresholds and being even more zealous .
|
|
|
|
I always thought these were the responsibility of the local authority. But work in >>conjuction with the police.
True to a degree, but it's a 'partnership' approach and the police input still costs the police i.e. salaries and a post filled etc. Depends if the costs to the police are fully refunded. If not, i'd suspect some slippage, because there's going to have to be some juggling.
I'm already aware of an accident investigation unit that is having to close and its' skilled staff re-deployed.
|
|
I had a near miss two weeks before Christmas - at least 35 mph in a 30 - I think by the time I was clocked (on the bike) and the time taken for the operator to dash through his van to get number I was out of the NSLs and under acceleration. No NIP to date.
|
I think by the time I was clocked (on the bike) and the time taken for the operator to dash through his van to get number I was out of the NSLs and under >>acceleration. No NIP to date.
My one and only zap was on the bike....in Wiltshire.....annoying thing was if i'd been going like hell, the operator would never have had chance to do the 'internal van sprint' to catch my number....plus the fact I...er...sort of...er...got the speed limit wrong, when on a dual carriageway with no central reservation....and..er...thought it was a 70, when it was a 60 ....:-(
|
|
I came into one's range today on the M4 at about 85mph. So they are still out there. And I doubt it was there hibernating. Will let you know.
|
|
|
|
|
I thought the vans were basically self funding under hypothication rules.
|
I thought the vans were basically self funding under hypothication rules.
>>
I'm not sure how the system works if the Traffic Unit has to lose a set number of posts (again) and they work out what's essential and what isn't....The Safety Camera posts might stay if the funding is up front and set in stone
|
One question I've never got to the bottom of relating to average speed SPECS cameras is that, in a stretch (say the 15 mile stretch of roadworks on the M1) there isn't just one at the start and one at the end, or even one after every junction - they seem to be placed at random.
So, what range are you being checked over if you drive the full distance - only the point you got picked up first to the end camera, or is the distance between each camera being checked - i.e. the next camera is the end of range 1, but also the start of range 2?
if you get my drift.....
|
oh, and one other - on the motorways that have average speed cameras controlling variable limits, such as the M42, when the limits changes on a gantry how quickly does the limit get enforced by the camera?.
i.e. does the car thats 10 yards away have to do an emergency brake to slow to the new limit before going under the gantry because the limit is enforced immediately?
Whilst I can see that, in a sense, these controlled areas do seem to work, I absolutely hate driving through them for reasons such as not knowing the answers to questions like this, so having to play it safe.....
....along with the fact that the limits enforced are sometimes outrageously low - such as a 20 limit on the approach to supposed roadworks when do one is in sight late at night, the traffic is light, and I am the only one who seems to feel the need to slow at all, rendering myself quite a hazard on the road.
|
IIRC on the M42 system you get 60 seconds after the speeds changes.
SPECS can calculate your average speed every time you pass a camera.
|
cheers - that helps.
Wouldn't it be a good idea though for the government to advertise such facts - one day soon someone is going to cause a pile up by braking sharply as they approach a gantry on the M42 and the limit changes downwards.
They spend enough of our money on adverts - in fact I think they prop up the commercial radio industry, where one advert in six is a government directive or information plug - perhaps one day they may inform us of something useful like this???
|
Last year I was travelling north on the M42 near the junction with the M6 toll road. It was about 9pm on a Saturday in August, there were no cars in front of me and four or five cars some distance behind.
As I approached on of the variable speed gantries, it suddenly flashed up something like 'Congestion Ahead' and a speed limit of 20mph. I was doing 70mph, so I had a quick look in my mirrors and slammed on the brakes. Naturally, the following cars caught up with me quickly and thankfully slowed down in time, but for a mile or so (until the end of the variable limit zone), I was terrified of somebody either ignoring or not noticing the limits and plowing into the back of us.
|
Yep, exactly the same as I feel when it happens, which is frequently. Don't the powers that be realise how dangerous putting a 20 limit in such circumstances is?
Sometimes I find the limit changes up or down by 10mph on every other gantry, for no obvious reason - it makes me wonder whether someone is sat in a control room having a laugh by playing God with the limits.
|
Know what you mean, Mile-Muncher, about the constant changing of the limits.
If you're not sure of the junction you need to exit at, the last thing you need is the uncertainty in your mind of what the last gantry's speed limit was.
The last couple of times I've used the variable speed section of the M42, I have kept to the inside lane, keeping up with the vehicle in front, no matter how quickly the other lanes are moving; should work well, unless I happen to be following a foreign lorry speeding and overtaking everybody on the inside lane.
Edited by mcguyver on 10/01/2010 at 16:05
|
SPECS can calculate your average speed every time you pass a camera.
And from the first (or any) camera to the last irrespective of how many there have been in between.
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Average speed cameras are to be introduced on a major urban road in east London for the first time.
The special cameras are to be installed on a 7.5 mile-stretch of the A13 and will be in force by this summer.
However, the speed limit will be raised from 40mph to 50mph on a section of the route once the 84 cameras are in place.
Transport for London (TfL), which is installing the cameras, hopes that they will halve the number of people killed or seriously injured along the road.
The cameras will monitor average driving speeds on the A13 between Canning Town and the Goresbrook interchange near Dagenham - a stretch where the collision rate has been almost a fifth higher than is typical of major roads in London.
TfL said nearly 500 collisions, including three fatal and 34 serious accidents, were recorded on this stretch of road between 2006 and 2008, with half the collisions being caused by speeding."
The future is average speed cameras?
|
|
The future? Ancient history if you live in Notts. My daily commute is an endless series of Specs cameras, which doesn't normally matter much due to the volume of traffic. But on the same routes late at night when there's no traffic, it's very easy to forget they are there...
|
>The future? Ancient history if you live in Notts
Or Northants.
|
|
|
|
No problem, I would far sooner stick pins in my eyes than drive the A13.
|
|
"Speed" cameras - yeah right! They track a car based on number plate recognition technology, do you REALLY think this is about speeding? Big Brother is watching you.
|
they ARE speed cameras.
You are already being tracked by ANPR cameras along that way anyway.
|
they ARE speed cameras. You are already being tracked by ANPR cameras along that way anyway.
Semantics, these new "speed" cameras track a vehicle regardless of whether it is speeding or not. Existing Gatso speed cameras trigger when they detect a car is speeding, if you're doing nothing wrong then you are not being tracked as a free, innocent citizen by a Gatso. When all speed camera are replaced by these new SPECS type, then we will have a national tracking system installed without our consent - what these camera will then be used for are a mere software update away. The ANPR cameras were fitted as part of London's "ring of steel" against the IRA simply tracking vehicles into and out of the city against a watch list of number plates. By turning speed camera into tracking cameras this becomes a much more sophisticated tracking system which could be used for anything Big Brother wishes.
|
ANPR WAS installed as part of the ring of steel, But is now extended around the country and growing. You are shouting down the wrong pipe my friend, that cat is already out of the stable and bolted.
|
SteveLee - remember the Sharon Beshinivsky shooting in Bradford?
The car was followed the 200+ miles to London using ANPR. As AE says too late to go on about being tracked wherever you drive - it's here and working 24/7.
Next it will be auto fines and points, Court dates whenever the system spots an untaxed, unMOT'd, uninsured vehicle.
|
I understand there is extensive ANPR but it had to go through parliament in terms of how it can be used and how far people's rights can be infringed. These "speed" cameras are massively expanding (and improving) the network without political consent. Old ANPR cameras aren't much cop, the SPECS stuff is outstanding night or day. Traffic master is a national ANPR system but it does not keep the full number plate details and disposes of the data after several minutes - this functionality is in hardware and cannot be changed on the fly. Not so for SPECS which are networked and are a software change away from being used for anything without our consent.
Data from London's congestion charge cameras are sometimes used by the police - this has got to be illegal - the state is stretching out its sticky fingers without political mandate to do so - this is wrong, wrong, wrong. Just because they're already doing it, it doesn't makes carrying on doing it right.
Just imagine if Hitler had access to the movements of individual people - how do we know what government we'll have in power in 40 years time? Fail to limit the power of the state at your peril - if there's one thing we know about humans is power corrupts and we're handing it over without a squeak.
|
"Just imagine if Hitler..."
Anyone see QI last week where Stephen Fry mentioned Godwin's Law, which states "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches" (cf en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law)
The above article also states that in some forums, "once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically "lost" whatever debate was in progress".
Sorry to interrupt :-)
|
|
|
|
Existing Gatso speed cameras trigger when they detect a car is speeding,
Unless it's a watchman camera in a gatso's clothing...
www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/222/222597_...l
I never even knew about watchman till i read about this.
|
|
Yes the the ANPR cat is long gone, there are dozens of the things in my area, traffic choke points, airport approach roads, (even the obscure ones used by the plane spotters in anoraks), and on top of traffic lights on through routes, (no not the traffic light sensors).
|
Smokie, The "Hitler" rule was in the context of accusing people of being a Nazi - not wondering what he could have done with today's big-brother databases and vehicle tracking technology. Labour used their anti-terrorism act aggressively against an ally sovereign state (Iceland) in financial difficulty - luckily Iceland isn't a bigger or better armed country, wars have been started for less. They used the same act to expel an old man from their conference who dared to question their tractor production figures. They used the same act to stop a woman reading the names of dead soldiers out in public. They've allowed a new extradition law that was only supposed to be used in extreme circumstances to attempt the extradition of a young mentally disturbed man to the US under terrorism charges (a capital offence) - just for looking for evidence of UFOs and doing no harm other than kicking the US security services up the **** for their lax firewalls.
If you trust giving those in power absolute power - bully for you - I don't.
|
>Labour used their anti-terrorism act aggressively against an ally sovereign state (Iceland) >in financial difficulty -
Because *YOUR* local council was about to loose its money and *YOUR* council tax would have to double to pay it. They did you a favour sunshine.
|
Because *YOUR* local council was about to loose its money and *YOUR* council tax would have to double to pay it. They did you a favour sunshine.
What are my local council doing gambling with my money in the first place? Other than small emergency funds how dare the council stash tens of million away at the same time increasing council tax - it should be illegal. Analyse beyond the first level and you'll realise what a liberty the council are taking with our money - If I want to invest my money in dodgy non-EU high interest accounts then it's up to me to do it - not the guys paid to empty my bins.
|
|
Please avoid politics in here - back to motoring please.
|
|
|
|
|
I think people may draw their own conclusions about this situation
www.thisisnottingham.co.uk/homenews/Police-apology...l
|
Computer says he was speeding though.
Trust the computer. Always, trust the computer.
|
|
|
|
From "The Daily Telegraph:
tinyurl.com/yzegmdd
"Average speed cameras could be installed on all the country's motorways to cut carbon emissions under proposals drawn up by the Government's environmental advisers."
Well, I can see it doing that. This initiative would need to be matched with one to enforce lane discipline, though.
Everyone could then tootle along at 69 MPH jammed up the harris of the vehicle in front. Lovely.
|
|
It happens in France, timed between toll booths.
|
Only if the gendarme is sitting at the Peage exit.
|
If they want to nick anyone on the M3 in the rush hour, they'll need to set them to about 20 mph! :-)
|
After reading the comments on the OP's link, I cant help but think the government will not implement this even if they want to.
Why, because there is no chance they will get in at the next election.
Also they have already signalled their own demise by already penalising the motorist enough.
Edited by diddy1234 on 25/01/2010 at 13:10
|
|
|
|
That is totally uncalled for, its another one of our evil dictatorship. War-against-the-motorist. Can they not see that these specs will have a repercussion to cause accidents. While speeding causes accidents so does tiredness & fatigue (Zombie driving). Do they not understand that it will encourage drivers to become "zombies" & watch their speedometers rather than watch the road ahead? Its a total shambles what are they thinking?
I read somewhere that specs can only measure somebodies average speed when they are occupying a single lane & stay in that lane, if the lanes are changed then they cannot "clock" your average speed.
If people are constantly doing 69 all the time then it will have another repercussion that motorists will start letting loose on other rural roads. When they are caged at a speed of 70mph they will start doing 100 or more on unguarded roads just to let their hair down. Or, other motorists will start to find it a faster option to drive wrecklessly on the road running paralell to the motorway at speeds of 100mph, overtaking the traffic on the road next door, which has been limited to 70. I know a road which is a candidate for that happening.
The A33 from the M3, people will leave the M3 at Winall (A34) to go on the A33/A30, then start driving like idiots to Basingstoke because they have no cameras watching them, so they behave like caged animals - attempting to overtake the M3 traffic that is running paralell. There are too many iffs & butts over this.
There is not enough evidence to suggest that us Brits are causing the Co2 emissions. Its just our government being nasty little bullies again, blaming us for the global changes.
|
|
On the odd occasion I use the section of M42 between the top of the M40 and the bottom of the M6, which is camera-enforced all the way, it seems quite civilised. Perhaps it won't scale up so well?
|
|
|
"...specs can only measure somebodies average speed when they are occupying a single lane & stay in that lane...."
Urban Myth. The designers would have to be pretty dumb to have overlooked this as a counter-measure...
Edited by smokie on 25/01/2010 at 13:09
|
"...specs can only measure somebodies average speed when they are occupying a single lane & stay in that lane...." Urban Myth. The designers would have to be pretty dumb to have overlooked this as a counter-measure...
Not urban myth, but fact. In the process of changing though (it may have happend by now). It was due to the certification of the system rather than a physical/software problem.
|
|
>>then start driving like idiots>>
Oh dear, not again.
|
Oh dear not again.
To put out a fire, starve it of fuel or oxygen - or *both*.
|
I was trawling across the internet & I found this...
www.speedcam.co.uk/
The website is quite "tongue in cheek" & does use some strong words of hatred against the Police force & it is a bit of a propaganda to hate the police describing Mobile Police Safety cameras as "Scameras" & calling them "Talivans" which I found to be quite amusing but it does contain some shocking photographic evidence of where the Police set up the vans to collect fines.
I was trawling through the pictures & some of the sneaky or downright nasty locations they pitch their vans are just plain dangerous, completely inconvenient, & or illegal (On double yellow lines, bus stops, solid white lines, etc etc). Then they have the cheek to send the offending motorists the fines through their letterboxes when they are clearly flouting the law themselves.
In some of the places they park the cameras, its obvious that some constabularies are hell-bent on collecting fines.
I really don't have any confidence in our justice system anymore. I think this whole speed camera thing is just the laziest policing that brings in the maximum amount of bacon, I just don't see how this "bone-idle" evidence can always be "court approved" because a computer or a camera said so, especially when there have been so many speeding errors over the years. What happened to human rights? Why can't we have an entrapment law?
|
Why can't we have an entrapment law?
Because its not entrapment. To entrap someone is to encourage, or to provide the means or facilities to break the law.
Putting up speed cameras does not fit that criteria,
|
I was speaking to some Americans & in most states catching motorists by camera is called "entrapment" A speeding offence in the US has to be done on the spot with the officer holding the caliberated equipment at the time of the offence commited. They are not allowed to video your car hidden behind a hedge (like our cops) with a cross-hair target pointed at it with the PP speed at the bottom right hand corner of the screen - then send you a NIP based on the calculation/evidence of the equipment within 14 days of the offence.
I'm not sure if the same entrapment law covers traffic/fixed speed cameras like Specs, Truvelo's, Gatso's etc etc.
I should imagine a lot of states in the US would stand against Specs being put up to ensure average speeds are kept. Not fair on us is it? We pay tax tax & more tax but get lumped with the maximum amount of convictions/fines while little red riding "hoodie" mugs an old lady & gets away with it.
|
Clearly you have never driven in the states, nor have you been knicked by a cop with a camera who WAS HIDING BEHIND AN ADVERTISING HOARDING.
This is the favourite way american cops catch you speeding. The only diference is the cop is holding the gun, not a pole. Further more you have no comeback at all. It is all cops evidence, no film no photo. He could be holding a gun with someone elses speed on it. Dont forget the local county gets the money.
Edited by Altea Ego on 25/01/2010 at 19:41
|
@ Altea Ego -
Our cops sometimes do exactly the same things as American Police except they hide the Mobile speed cameras a.k.a Talivans.
However, I wouldn't like to say that they don't jump out on suspected speeders as I nearly ran a suicidal Police officer down when she was "checking" my speed.
I was going along the A36 towards Salisbury, I was cruising at 57-60 along a single carridgeway around near Whiteparish. I was comfortably cruising around a light bend when suddenly a Female cop jumped out of the bushes in my path, quite literally in the middle of the road.
I swerved hard to avoid killing her as she was on a suicide mission to catch me speeding. I blasted the horn at her but she still had the contraption pointed at the back of my van. I saw that there were only 2 officers doing the speed checks, both female. They had parked the Volvo estate so it was well-hidden behind the foliage. I wanted to stop to get their car registration & their numbers on their shoulders to complain bitterly to the Police about it. I couldn't because I would have been late delivering the glass so I had to forget it.
In reguards to the americans hiding themselves I think you should see some of these pictures where our mobile speed cameras are camoflauging their vans better than the army does.
www.speedcam.co.uk/index2.htm
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 01/02/2010 at 00:13
|
|
|
|
|
Peter - what is it you object to? I agree it might seem unfair if the speed limit on a stretch of road isn't clear and police/cameras concentrate on that stretch rather than clarify the limit, but is that what you mean? Presumably you aren't just saying that everyone should be allowed to speed?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
